From: Edward C. Zimmermann
> What we are still missing then in the standard, I think, are:
> - clear expression of what has been implicit:
> o that "1994" has year precision, "1994-06" month precision etc..
> A number of examples, I think, would be good.. down to highly
> expressions such as !994-05-12T12:22.33Z" (decimal seconds
> following the
> model I expressed for weights with the limitation to the Caesium
> standard for time)
> o the consequences of precision.
> - how to compare things expressed in different precisions.
> We don't meed a wider syntax.. only to be more explicit and demanding
> in our standard's text :-)
Ok, Ed, you write that section and send it to me and I'll put it in.